I don't think organization requesting funds will make
a bit of difference.  I think the more important item
considered to the government bean counter will be
what the money is used for.

To use Nick's example below, any Wiccan organization
couldn't just ask for funds.  The money has to be
"used" for something.  Like the "Wiccan Benevolent
Organization for Unwed Mothers" or something like
that.

Tracy Johnson
MSI Schaevitz Sensors


-----Original Message-----
From: Nick Demos [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2001 12:35 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: OT: Church and State


> There was a letter to the editor in today's (?) L.A. Times newpaper
wondering
> how the President's new office of faith-based charities will react if a
group
> of Wiccans should apply for government funds.  My guess is that some
religions
> will be considered more eligible than others with respect to this funding,
that
> the government will be designating some religions "good" and other
religions
> "bad" (I seem to recall hearing about "good" religions and "bad" religions
in
> Salem).
>
> Do we really want government bureaucracy determining which religions are
"good"
> and which are "bad"?  A strong church/state firewall prevents this from
> happening.
> --
I disagree.  It is done now.  For example there are qualifications for a
non-profit organization
which most churches apply for.  I have no problem with qualifying churches
as long as
it is done on a non-idealogical basis.  Qualifications might be:

1.  Non-profit as above.
2.  Financially stable.
3.  Open to anyone.

Regards,

Nick D.